By using this website, you consent to our use of cookies. For more information on cookies see our Cookie Policy.

Sorry the hardest word for Armstrong

Fri, Jan 18, 2013, 00:00

Cycling:The formerly defiant Lance Armstrong once said, "As long as I live, I will deny ever doping," but sitting face to face with Oprah Winfrey in an interview that was broadcast in the early hours of this morning, he reversed course. With Winfrey, he lost his icy stare and buried his cutting words. Looking nervous and swallowing hard several times, he admitted to using through most his cycling career a cocktail of drugs, including testosterone, cortisone, human growth hormone and the blood booster EPO.

Yet, like always, Armstrong could not help fighting.

He called his doping regimen simple and conservative, rejecting volumes of evidence by the US Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) that the drug programme on his Tour de France-winning teams was "the most sophisticated, organised and professionalised" doping scheme in the history of cycling.

He said that he was not the kingpin of the doping programme on his teams, as the anti-doping agency claimed, and that he was just doping the way the rest of his teammates were at the time. He said he had doped, beginning in the mid-1990s, through 2005, the year he won his record seventh Tour. He said that he took EPO, but "not a lot," and that he had rationalised his use of testosterone because one of his testicles had been removed during his battle against cancer.

"I thought, surely I'm running low," he said of the banned testosterone he took to gain an edge in his performance.

At times during the interview, which will resume tonight, Armstrong seemed genuinely humble, admitting that he was "a flawed character" and that he would spend the rest of his life trying to apologise to people and regain their trust. "There will be people who hear this and never forgive me," he said. "I understand that."

ADVERTISEMENT

But when asked about the people he had tried to crush while he tried to keep his doping secret - people like the former masseuse Emma O'Reilly or his former teammate Frankie Andreu and Andreu's wife, Betsy - he showed little contrition. Those are some of the people who claimed he had doped and whom he subsequently publicly claimed were liars. He had called O'Reilly a prostitute and an alcoholic.

In the interview, Armstrong acknowledged calling Betsy Andreu crazy. But with a suggestion of a smirk, he said he never claimed she was fat. He said he had been a bully his whole life, before contradicting himself a minute later, saying he became a bully only after he survived cancer and resumed his cycling career.

And when he said he never failed a drug test - saying, "I passed them because there was nothing in the system" - he contradicted himself again. When Winfrey asked if his urine samples from the 1999 Tour retroactively tested positive for EPO, he said yes. When she pressed him, he admitted that he received a backdated prescription from a team doctor after he tested positive for cortisone at the 1999 Tour.

Armstrong did not delve into the details of his doping, and Winfrey never asked. He did not explain how it was done, who helped him do it or how, exactly, he perpetuated his myth for so long. He said he was not comfortable talking about other people when asked about the infamous Italian sports doctor Michele Ferrari, his former trainer, who is now serving a lifetime ban for doping his athletes.

When Winfrey asked if he would cooperate with Usada in building doping cases against others in the sport, he masterfully skirted the question.

Travis Tygart, the chief executive of the anti-doping agency, called Armstrong's admission "a step in the right direction." But it did not really matter what Armstrong told Winfrey in the interview, at least according to Tygart and other anti-doping agency officials who hold the key to Armstrong's future as a professional athlete.

Armstrong's reason for coming clean was not to unburden himself of the deception he fought to keep secret for so long. It was to take the first step toward mitigating the lifetime ban from Olympic sports that he received from Usada in autumn, according to people close to him who did not want their names published because they wanted to stay in Armstrong's good graces.

Anti-doping officials need to hear more from Armstrong than just an apology and a rough outline of his doping. They need details. And lots of them.

"Anything he says on TV would have no impact whatsoever under the rules on his lifetime suspension," Tygart said.

Armstrong, 41, wants to compete in triathlons and in running events again, but he is barred from many of those events because they are sanctioned by organisations that follow the World Anti-Doping Code (Wada). To get back into those events, he must tell anti-doping officials details of who helped him dope, who knew about his doping and who helped him create one of the biggest cover-ups in the history of sports.

In digging up those details, Armstrong might be able to dig himself out of his lifetime ban in exchange for a reduced ban of, perhaps, eight years. It might also shine the spotlight on some of the most powerful men in the sport of cycling.

In the end, though, Armstrong seemed to understand that his actions and lies were not normal, even in a sport that was rife with doping during the time he dominated it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Winfrey asked him if he ever felt his doping was wrong, and he answered no, and then added that he realised that was scary.

When she asked him if he had ever felt bad about his doping, he said no, and then said, "Even scarier."

Winfrey then asked, "Did you feel in any way that you were cheating?"

He said no, "that's the scariest," and went on to explain that he had even looked up the word "cheat" in the dictionary once to find out the exact meaning. He found it to be "gaining an advantage on a rival or foe" and convinced himself that he was not cheating because he considered cycling to be a level playing field then, with all the top riders using drugs.

But throughout Winfrey's interview, Armstrong failed to do the one thing many people had been waiting for: He failed to apologise directly to all the people who believed in him, all the cancer survivors and cycling fans who thought his fairytale story was true.

Not once did he look into the camera and say, without qualification, "I'm sorry." -
New York Times Service

Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.

We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.